I understand perfectly well idea of free software development and people start such projects with different motives. However, I also understand that many projects have been started by people and later had cooperation with other entities that see potential in the project. As you are aware, IBM has started or assisted a number of these and so have open source commercial enterprises who will sometimes make money through support. That being said the making of PulseAudio is no small effort and that people do this as their time allows along with other volunteers. Of course more knowledgable sources can get it done faster than someone trying to reverse engineer the work of not one but 2 projects.
As your todo list is as you say, filled up, you've indicated that someone else from outside needs to do the work. With luck someone soon will be willing to step up to the task and certainly any hints that can be provided would be helpful. My hope is that as people try to make use of your work and find a few things that could use refining others will take on the task. I had considered whether to take stab myself but my experience in writing code for sound devices is nearly nonexistant and it would take time for me to be up to speed. (I'm guessing at least a dedicated year) Anyway, thank you for your response. I now have an idea of what it would take for more work to be done on this. (OSS drivers as well as PulseAudio) thanks for taking the time to respond to my inquiry so quickly. Jonah A. Libster --- On Thu, 1/15/09, Lennart Poettering <[email protected]> wrote: > From: Lennart Poettering <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [pulseaudio-discuss] PulseAudio and functionality in OSS 4.1 > To: [email protected] > Date: Thursday, January 15, 2009, 3:23 PM > On Thu, 15.01.09 10:36, Jonah Libster > ([email protected]) wrote: > > Hi! > > > Folks, I've been seeing some problems with > PulseAudio and > > functioning with OSS 4.1. I've had far better > experience with my > > [...] > > > bit confrontational on both sides. I could be wrong of > course. Each > > is saying its a problem with the other. I suspect > there is an > > element of truth in both. I was sent a reply to a > ticket saying that > > "no one was interested" in doing any > patchwork to get oss 4.x > > working with pulseaudio. I trust this is not as > extreme as the > > comment sounds, as there are those who see the > benefits of the OSS > > Drivers, especially on high end hardware. > > I think you misunderstand how Free Software works. Free > Software is > generally about scratching your own (or your > employer's) itches. It is > generally not a place where random people can come and wish > something > and get that implemented for free by some enthusiasts. > People of > course can express their wishes, but it is up the people > actually > coding things how they set their priorities. > > Now, people have been asking for OSS4 support. That is > tracked in bug > #247. However noone capable has yet shown up to actually do > something > about it. That's what I call "noone was > interested" -- That does not > mean howeer I would not be willing to merge a patch or give > hints how > to fix the issue -- in fact I even explained in that bug > report what > the problem is which needs to be fixed in PA's OSS > support. However > due to lack of documentation on OSS's side and the fact > that noone sat > down to fix the code things are still unchanged. > > So, fixing #247 requires external contribution, since the > issue is not > a priority to any of the pa devs. > > This situation has been explained in the bug report btw. > > > I mysaelf am one of those > > who given the state of ALSA, is not prepared to go to > poor sound on > > high grade hardware and no one should have to. Its an > opportunity to > > show off the best PulseAudio has to offer. (and on a > high end linux > > based audio appliance that is saying something) > > This is nonsense. OSS4 doesn't cut it. I think I > expressed and > explained my criticism of OSS4 often enough, so I am not > going to > repeat myself here. > > > I was wondering what it would take to get one of your > people to > > start some work on this. Linux is at a stage it could > do even more > > serious damage to MS than it already has, but sound > quality is still > > an issues. I myself had had issues with Alsa that OSS > fixes but > [...] > > I'm now writing you,the developers of PulseAudio. > What will it take > > to get this bridge filled in with OSS 4.x and > establish better > > cooperation between you and 4Front, or whomever is > doing work for > > Again, that's not how thing work. > > I am always happy to take patches and give hints how to fix > things, > but OSS4 support is nothing I am going to work on myself. > My TODO list > is already stacked enough. > > Waiting for patches, > > Lennart > > -- > Lennart Poettering Red Hat, Inc. > lennart [at] poettering [dot] net ICQ# 11060553 > http://0pointer.net/lennart/ GnuPG 0x1A015CC4 > _______________________________________________ > pulseaudio-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > https://tango.0pointer.de/mailman/listinfo/pulseaudio-discuss _______________________________________________ pulseaudio-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://tango.0pointer.de/mailman/listinfo/pulseaudio-discuss
